Gudanowski v. John Doe, N.Y. State Trooper
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:20-cv-00111
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 8
Gudanowski v. John Doe: Judge Briccetti ordered help identifying defendants in a force lawsuit and required an amended complaint.
Paul T. Gudanowski, the eight unidentified New York State troopers, the two unidentified East Rutherford, New Jersey, police officers, and the New York Attorney General were affected by the identification and amended-complaint directives.
What happened
In Gudanowski v. John Doe, Paul T. Gudanowski, who is incarcerated, sued under a federal civil-rights law, alleging that eight New York State troopers and two East Rutherford, New Jersey, police officers used excessive force against him. The defendants were identified only as John Does.
The court found that the complaint provided enough information for the New York Attorney General to identify the officers involved in the alleged January 2, 2017 incident in Rockland County. The Attorney General was ordered to provide the officers’ identities and service addresses to the court and Gudanowski by May 4, 2020.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti also ordered Gudanowski to file an amended complaint naming the officers within 30 days after receiving that information. The order did not decide whether excessive force occurred; the court said it would screen the amended complaint after it was filed.
The detailed version
- Gudanowski v. John Doe, N.Y. State Trooper · No. 7:20-cv-00111
- Vincent Briccetti
- Mar. 4, 2020
Background
Paul T. Gudanowski filed this pro se action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that allows certain civil-rights claims against state or local officials. He alleged that defendants used excessive force against him. The opinion states that he was incarcerated in Collins Correctional Facility. The defendants included eight unidentified New York State troopers and two police officers from East Rutherford, New Jersey.
The court had already granted Gudanowski permission to proceed without paying the filing fee in advance. The order notes that prisoners must still pay the full filing fee over time under the applicable statute.
Identification of Defendants
Because Gudanowski was proceeding without a lawyer and had supplied enough information about the alleged January 2, 2017 incident in Rockland County, the court applied the rule that a court should assist an unrepresented litigant in identifying an unknown defendant. The court ordered the New York Attorney General, as attorney and agent for the New York State Police, to determine the identities of the John Doe state troopers and the addresses where they could be served. The Attorney General was directed to provide that information to Gudanowski and the court by May 4, 2020. The order also stated that the agency might be able to identify the two New Jersey officers or provide their employer’s name and contact information, even though those officers were not employed by the New York State Police.
Required Amended Complaint and Next Steps
Within 30 days after receiving the identification information, Gudanowski was required to file an amended complaint naming the John Doe defendants. The amended complaint would replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. After the amended complaint was filed, the court would screen it and, if necessary, direct the Clerk of Court to prepare service forms and send the documents to the U.S. Marshals Service for service.
Disposition
The court directed the Clerk of Court to mail the order and an information package to Gudanowski and to mail the order and complaint to the New York Attorney General. Judge Vincent L. Briccetti’s order addressed defendant identification and the next filing steps; it did not decide the merits of Gudanowski’s excessive-force allegations.
Read the full 8-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.